Friday, August 30, 2013

Known Knowns

"There are known knowns; there are things we know that we know.
There are known unknowns; that is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know.
But there are also unknown unknowns – there are things we do not know we don't know."

I remember this wonderful bit of nonsense from this clown.

So does the rest of the world it seems. Why else did John Kerry keep saying:

"we know that the Assad regime has the largest chemical weapons
programs in the entire Middle East. We know that the regime has used
those weapons multiple times this year, and has used them on a smaller
scale but still it has used them against its own people, including not
very far from where last Wednesday’s attack happened.

We know that the regime was specifically determined to rid the
Damascus suburbs of the opposition, and it was frustrated that it hadn’t
succeeded in doing so.

Weknow that for three days before the attack, the Syrian regime’s
chemical weapons personnel were on the ground in the area, making
preparations.And we know that the Syrian regime elements were told to prepare for
the attack by putting on gas masks and taking precautions associated
with chemical weapons.We know that these were specific instructions.We know where the rockets were launched from, and at what time. We
know where they landed, and when. We know rockets came only from
regime-controlled areas and went only to opposition-controlled or
contested neighborhoods." And on and on and on about what we know. Because you see, the liars in The Bush Regime, spent our reputation, our troops and our treasure on a war about, ironically WMD's. Weapons that were no where to be found. People probably don't believe we know anything. Who can blame them?

Thousands of innocent Syrians have died. Would we have been involved sooner, if not for a war weary public and a government that doesn't even want to take care of it's own citizenry because we're broke? I think that what Assad did was reprehensible and he certainly deserves to be punished. Let's see, who's with us? The U.K. uh no.., France won't talk of war, but is talking sanctions.I hear Turkey and Australia are with us. Germany? Nein, Spain? Maybe. That's funny, I wonder why no one really wants to side with us against Syria?Maybe because of our so-called "Iraq experience." "And I will tell you it has done so more than mindful of the Iraq experience. We will not repeat that moment." No, we won't, because at least people believed us then. Some people think this is all about oil all over again. But a lot of people are sick of our meddling in the Middle East. Not only that, but this is not the first time Assad gassed his own people. I do think this is and has been a serious situation. But I don't know one person who wants us to get involved in any more war. When people behave with impunity, Like the people who forced us into a false war, for a false reason, this is the result. American people that deeply distrust the government and it seems we are not alone. The rest of the world doesn't trust us either. I guess Mr. Rumsfeld would call that, a "known known."

5 comments:

Despite assurances from somewhere within the administration that our retaliatory strike against Syria would not target Assad, I think that, in addition to taking out the chemical weapons stocks and Syrian aircraft, that is precisely what we should do. Or if not him directly, then at least his various residences.

There have been reports recently that Assad may not have been control of whomever was responsible for the gas attacks. I would take him out anyway, as an object lesson about what happens to despots who can't control their own military and still refuse to step down. We ought to demonstrate to Syria (and by this example to Iran) that we are more focused than they are, and also meaner sons of bitches than even they are.

All this just from the air, or by missiles launched at sea, please. No boots on the ground. Bomb and then go away, and let the Syrians iron out the details by themselves.

Crank, if you were in charge, I think this would be cut and dried. Unfortunately, we have a lot of unknown, unknowns. Maybe some drones could come in handy? I don't really know since I am no military expert. But I agree with you, off that psychopath, because that's what Assad is.

Assassinating a foreign leader is illegal precisely because it is one action that developing countries can take that could possibly succeed when a full-scale war would never do so. It really serves to protect the leaders of the great powers, so we have the bizarre policy of killing leaders with 500 lb bombs rather than stilettos.